GRALISTAIR

Exactly what I love to see in my people -it encourages/stimulates innovation ^ -though of course one of my potential picks would be way too out of the box for most.

rwoman

FTers should be able to disagree, discuss, etc.

It's the personal attacks and sniping at times that seems to be counter productive.

GRALISTAIR

Perfectly stated

Kiwi Flyer

Just a thought to throw into the mix. Perhaps a smaller talkboard (e.g. 7) if there is less to do? This would also increase the vote count for the marginal elected talkboard member, if that is considered desirable.

CMK10

I agree that I am part of the problem with this current TalkBoard. I take it too personally and get angry at some of my fellow members and it has spilled out into the public forum.

But I'm not alone in the blame. There are members who come here and attack us. They're rude and snarky and impossible to please. They complain just to complain and because of the more lax rules, they're allowed to do it. I don't understand why some people act this way, it's not at all productive and helpful but it's definitely contributed to the problems TB is having.

kipper

Thank you for taking responsibility for some of this. However, blaming members seems a bit harsh. If you feel a member is being rude, why not engage with them via PM to find out why, just simply ignore their posts, or if their posts violate the TOS of FT, report the post to the moderators.

GRALISTAIR

Sounds like I would definitely not enjoy being a member of TB. Glad to be a general member of FT

JDiver

You mean like rwoman?

jason8612

I also think that TB should move to an appointed board. Voting numbers keep falling and other than a few FTers checking the TB forum, there isn't much discussion (and really, simple matters shouldn't have to take weeks to get approved).
I wouldn't mind being on the appointed board.

GUWonder

The real downside of the elimination of TB by way of an appointed board of FT members -- <redacted>-- is that this part of FT Community forum may meet its demise (in some way) and thereafter opportunities to discuss what is good/better for FT may no longer have this public forum on FT open for all general member input too.

That said, unless there is a more healthy rotation in the ranks of the appointed/elected and a shift away from trying to play to the peanut gallery obsessed with "signal to noise" ratio adjustments, then this community is going to stagnate in its utility. And I'm of the opinion that those who are more interested in more democratic and transparent processes are more likely to tolerate a more open channel of communication (necessary for healthier dynamics) to improve this place than people who are on the inside track for special appointments. Rather than eliminating TB, perhaps the easiest way to drive up interest in TB and keep it alive is by empowering it to do things that have not been allowed to it? Of course, if this doesn't happen -- and I don't expect it to happen -- then TB is going to end up being what it has become or even less than what it already is.

84fiero

I'd venture to say that most members, to the extent they are aware of TB at all, only know about the fairly small number of threads in this forum about actual or proposed motions - some of which are miniscule matters like an obvious name change to a forum. Which as noted upthread is natural as the site has matured and stabilized.

You've noted that TB still serves important functions not immediately obvious "outside" of it, and I certainly take your word that it does. Maybe if the membership were more aware of that behind-the-scenes work and what it means for the site, there would be some uptick in interest and participation in elections, etc. which would keep some new blood circulating through the board. No, we won't ever have crazy-high participation rates - even real-world elections don't have that - but it could help.

And I don't mean simple descriptions like "it's a good sounding board and set of advisors for the CD". That's all well and good, but what are the positive results and impacts to the site, because of those TB advisory role functions, for example?

I'd add that some of what ends up being alluded to by some TB members in forum posts, or leaked out, regarding the TB inner workings isn't always helpful to its perception...i.e., comments about interpersonal conflict; a "bad apple" or two; superfluous drama. So maybe some positive PR would help.

Or maybe none of it would make a difference to elections and as you said, the site has just grown past the point where there is any meaning in discussing "the community" on FT.

What do other large internet forums do in terms of management and direction of the site?

tcook052

Such as?

GRALISTAIR

Of course my mistake. I forgot that rwoman is in European time - actually Zulu

JDiver

You might note some posts referencing moderation have been redacted or wholly deleted. That's because one feature that hasn't changed over the years is that discussion of moderation is not acceptable; it is certainly dilatory and off topic in this thread.

JDiver, Moderator

tom911

Have you heard anything from the Community Director in response to the thread you started? As it hasn't had any new posts in over a week, do you contemplate any further action or is this just another thread, like the one you started last year asking for member input ( http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/talkb...-need-one.html ), that isn't going anywhere?